Transcript If higher education is at the heart of Europe 2020, why do

If higher education is at the heart of Europe
2020, why do European universities fair
poorly in global rankings? A review of policy
responses
Ellen Hazelkorn
Vice President, Research and Enterprise, and Dean of the Graduate
Research School
Higher Education Policy Research Unit (HEPRU)
Dublin Institute of Technology
CEPS Symposium, University of Ljubljana
24-25 November 2011
www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise
“The Union has today set itself a new strategic goal for the next decade: to
become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the
world capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and
greater social cohesion”. (Lisbon European Council 23 And 24 March 2000, Presidency Conclusions,
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/summits/lis1_en.htm)
“Europe is no longer setting the pace in the global race for knowledge and
talent, while emerging economies are rapidly increasing their investment in
higher education....too few European higher education institutions are
recognised as world class in the current, research oriented global university
rankings... And there has been no real improvement over the past years.”
(European Commission (2011) “Supporting growth and jobs – an agenda for the modernisation of Europe’s higher
education system”, COM(2011)567/2, http://ec.europa.eu/education/higher-education/doc/com0911_en.pdf, p.
2)
www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise
Themes
• EU Higher Education and Research policy and tools
• Selective National responses
• Some Implications
www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise
Globalisation and Europe
• Higher education and the application of knowledge is undisputed source
of social, economic and political power in the age of globalisation;
• Not surprising that the productivity, quality and status of HE and
university-based research have become vital indicators of a nation’s – and
correspondingly, the EU’s – ability to compete successfully in the global
economy;
• Emergence and rising prominence of global rankings have linked the
investment attractiveness of nations with the talent-catching and
knowledge-producing capacity of HE;
• The world order is regularly presented as a league table, in which the
fortunes of nations are reflected in the performance of universities.
www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise
Indicator of Global Competitiveness?
Top 100
Universities
THE-QS
ARWU
QS
THE-TR
2007
2008
2009
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2010
2011
2010
2011
US
37
37
32
53
54
55
54
53
31
31
54
51
Europe
35
36
38
34
34
32
33
33
42
40
28
31
Australia/
New
Zealand
9
8
9
2
3
3
3
4
8
7
5
4
Asia Pacific
(incl. Israel)
13
14
16
7
5
6
6
6
15
18
10
9
Canada
6
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
5
Latin
America/
Africa
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise
Performance Scorecard: R & I Indicators
www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise
International Student Mobility
OBHE report (2007) classifies the international players – with their respective
shares of the market:
Major Players – USA (22%), UK (12%) and Australia (11%);
Middle Powers – Germany (10%) and France (10%);
Evolving Destinations – Japan (5%), Canada (5%) and New Zealand (3%);
Emerging Contenders – Malaysia (2%), Singapore (2%) and China (7%).
Group to watch is Emerging Contenders which has traditionally been major
net importers of educations services. They are rethinking their own capacitybuilding strategies and become net exporters, seeking to capitalize on cultural
synergies within the region (Robertson, 2007,
http://globalhighered.wordpress.com/2007/09/30/international-student-mobility-patterns-and-trends/)
).
www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise
European Policy Drivers (1)
1. Bologna Process (1999 - ):
– Sorbonne Declaration, 1998: “harmonization of the architecture of the
European higher education system”, paved the way for Bologna with the
objective that “the Europe we are building is not only that of the Euro, the
banks and the economy, it must be a Europe of knowledge as well”;
– Anticipated need for enhanced convergence across national systems to create
a coherent system of higher education able to compete internationally;
– Predicated on free movement of students, faculty and workers across national
boundaries facilitated by “trustworthy information and with the assurance
that their performance will be recognised in other parts of Europe” (Reichert,
2009, 107).
– Vision equally outward-looking, on the basis that to encourage and facilitate
talent and investment from around the world requires a system easily
understood and harmonious and not constrained by parochialism.
www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise
European Policy Drivers (2)
2. Lisbon Strategy (2000 - )
– Whereas Bologna is focused on co-operation and ‘equal position of all
institutions and systems’, Lisbon is explicitly focused on competition, ‘intended
to produce [a] more hierarchical and stratified’ HE landscape (van der Wende,
2009, 321);
– Open method of co-ordination = ‘softer’ process by which EU drives HE reform
without intruding on national rights – similar to OECD (Gornitzka, 2005);
– Key themes: quality and improving excellence, measuring performance,
attracting talent, international competitiveness;
– Underlining theme is transparency, comparability and differentiation;
– By stressing the importance of measuring performance and competitiveness,
the European Commission saying the future will be based on demonstrated
merit rather than assertion.
www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise
Rankings = Clarion Call for Action
• Rankings accelerated change process already starting in Europe – and gave
it an added sense of urgency.
“Last year the Shanghai Jiao Tong University’s Institute of Education ranked the world’s
top 500 universities on academic and research performance. For the European Union,
the news is not all that good. The study shows that 35 of the top 50 Universities in the
world are American …” (Dempsey, 2004).
• Similar concerns voiced:
– Lambert, R. and N. Butler (2006) Future of European Universities. Renaissance
or Decay?;
– Aghion, P., M. Dewatripont, C. Hoxby, A. Mas-Colell and A. Sapir (2007) ‘Why
Reform Europe’s Universities?’;
– Dewatripont, M. (2008) ‘Reforming Europe’s Universities’;
– Ritzen, J. (2010) A Chance for European Universities Or: Avoiding the Looming
University Crisis in Europe.
www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise
Key messages
• Too few European higher education institutions are recognised as world
class in the current, research-oriented global university rankings;
– US has only ~200 research-intensive universities while too many of Europe’s
~4000 universities claim to be research-intensive;
• European universities suffer from poor governance, insufficient autonomy
and often perverse incentives;
• Public policy has favoured HE as public good, supporting social/cultural
objectives rather than economic ones in belief that all universities should
be similar in quality rather than some being more excellent than others;
• Public funding is spread too thinly across too many universities;
• There is a need for university reform and modernisation, and to
concentrate funding in a few universities in order to compete.
www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise
Focus on Quality and Excellence
•
“It is the quality of European higher education institutions, measured (among
other ways) through the volume and scope of institutions' scientific - in the
widest sense of the word - and technological research activities, which is
crucial.” (2001)
•
“Universities should be funded more for what they do than for what they are,
by focusing funding on relevant outputs rather than inputs...” (2006, 7);
•
The “challenges posed by globalisation require that the European Higher
Education Area and the European Research Area be fully open to the world and
that Europe's universities aim to become worldwide competitive players” (2007,
3);
•
The “performance of education systems must be enhanced, and the
international attractiveness of Europe's higher education reinforced” (2010, 34);
•
The “potential of European higher education institutions to fulfil their role in
society and contribute to Europe’s prosperity remains underexploited.” (2011, 2).
www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise
Select Actions
2001: Erasmus Mundus: global scholarship, talent mobility and recruitment;
2002/2003: work programme/reports emphasizing role of system to aid
Lisbon agenda, and importance of 3% target for R&D expenditure;
2002 to 2006: FP6 emphasis on capacity building and intensification of R&D
via formation of virtual ‘networks of excellence’;
2007-2013: FP7 established EIT via KICs in select fields with emphasis on
geographic co-location via designated nodes; ERC with mobility of funding;
2005: U-Map responds to EU concern over “uniformity in provision”
(van der
Wende, 2009, 326; van Vught, 2009);
2009-2013: U-Multirank (CHERPA, 2010a, 2010b) provides mechanism to
differentiate European universities while paying homage to diversity;
2014-: FP8 will further strengthen consolidation and concentration, linked to
classification and ranking.
www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise
France
• 2007 Senate report said researchers disadvantaged in favour of Englishspeaking institutions (Bourdin, 2007–2008);
• 2007 legislation granting greater institutional autonomy to encourage
stronger management and planning;
• 2008 French Presidency conference championed new EU ranking;
• 2008 Operation Campus established 10 regional centres of excellence to
enhance capacity (Landry, 2010; Marshall, 2010), €8m;
• 2009 additional funding but not “distributed evenly” (Enserink, 2009a; Enserink,
2009b);
• 2010 build Paris-Saclay super-campus (€4.4bn) to be among global top 10
(Anon, 2010d; Landry, 2010) + ‘Giant’ @ €500m (Prest, 2010).
‘We want the best universities in the world....How many universities do we
have? 83? We're not going to divide the money by 83.’ (Nicolas Sarkozy, President,
France, 2009)
www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise
Germany
• ARWU highlighted gap between historical/self perception and external
assessment:
We have a lot of very good universities across the board in Germany, a high average
standard, but what we lack are really top universities … The latest ranking table clearly
shows why it is that Germany needs top universities (Dufner, 2004).
• A year later, June 2005, government launched Exzellenzinitiative.
– Phase 1, 2006-2011: €1.9bn earmarked for three initiatives, open only to
universities: Graduate schools and Excellence Clusters + Institutional Strategic
Development = 10 winners;
– Phase 2, 2012-2017: €2.7 bn.
• Greater collaboration/merger between research institutes and
universities, selective recruitment of students and faculty, merit
pay, additional salary benefits, etc.
www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise
UK
• While less publicly responsive to the backwash from global rankings –
given standing of UK universities in the rankings – UK not immune:
– RAE has had effect of concentrating research – and driving changes in
institutional/national research landscape;
– Pressure on universities focuses on “excellence” rather than being comprehensive;
– Shorter qualifications – associate degrees, 2/3 yr BA.
• Changes in Funding model (Browne,
– Tuition fee raises;
– Lifting of student ‘cap’;
– Preferential funding for higher achieving students;
– Diminution in government funding for arts, humanities and social sciences – with
emphasis on STEM.
www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise
Restructuring European HE and Research
Systems
• EU actions have gone beyond simply encouraging greater competitiveness,
diversity and modernisation of HE organisations and systems;
• Many statements applaud diversity of European HE, but too many
mediocre universities responsible for poor showing in global rankings:
...higher education institutions too often seek to compete in too many areas, while
comparatively few have the capacity to excel cross the board. As a consequence,
too few European higher education institutions are recognised as world class in
the current, research-oriented global university rankings... (European Commission,
2011, 2)
• EU has been slowly, quietly and systematically restructuring European
higher education and research (Maassen and Stensaker, 2010);
• Because uneven distribution of capability/capacity across EU’s 32
member/candidate countries and HEIs, there will be greater hierarchical
differentiation, with concentration in handful of HEIs/member states.
www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise
R&D expenditure as % of GDP, 2008
www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise
‘Harvard Here’ Model
Gavin Moodie, www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise
correspondence 7 June 2009
Emerging Global Model
• EU following strategy of other regions/countries, notably China, South
Korea, Taiwan, Malaysia, India, Japan, Singapore,
• Emerging global model (EGM) based on top 100 universities
(Mohrman et al. ,
2008):
– Mission transcending boundaries of nation-state;
– Increasing intensification of research/knowledge production;
– Diversified funding beyond government support and student
contributions;
– Operates worldwide via networked nodes.
www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise
Shape of Things to Come? (1)
•
Because ‘no government can fund all the post-secondary education its
citizens want’, many have made the insidious connection between
excellence and exclusiveness (Daniel, 2011);
•
The demand for higher education & the knowledge society is pushing up
the status premium of elite universities:
–
–
Powerful forces are pushing a return to elite models of knowledge
production conducted in/by a handful of "world class universities“;
This represents a
–
Major societal rethink about egalitarianism with a renewed
emphasis on elite institutions (Kehm, 2009);
–
Major shift away from the traditional Humboldtian idea of
universities (Van Vught, 1996);
www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise
Shape of Things to Come? (2)
•
Ironically, at a time when higher education is in greatest demand – and is
asked to provide greater impact/benefit for society – the EU is pursuing a
policy in which HE is becoming increasingly unfettered by the nation state
(Kwiek, 2009), and arguably unresponsive, as it diversifies/privatizes its
funding base, recruits talent internationally and engages globally;
•
This is likely to lead to greater hierarchical differentiation between
privatised, selective, research, elite universities and public-dependent,
recruiting, teaching, mass HEIs, systems – and member states.
www.dit.ie/researchandenterprise